- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Not sure how many read this section but there has been an unsavoury word or two on there for a while now, mainly between two posters who I’m sure won’t mind me naming, ERL and Griff.
ERL usually informs us of a horse’s passing by sometimes posting an account of the horse’s progress through the race or recent history of their results, which could be implied as the fault of the jockey/trainer/owner for carrying on with the horse when possibly in his opinion the horse could have been pulled up/retired.
Griff usually responds in a way to tell ERL that the section is to report on a horse’s death and not to scrutinise why the horse has died and if he does this should expect a response as ERL has posted his opinion.
Whoever you think is in the right, I don’t think the Memorials section is the place to discuss these things as these can become a little heated despite them both giving their point of view in well written posts. This can be seen as disrespectful to the horse.
Should we have a separate thread in the HR Section so they can argue all they want, within reason?
No Homer I don’t.
The Memorial Section should be regarded as just that, a place for acknowledgement and appreciation of a particular horse that has died, not one for opinion or blame………..in my opinion.
Opinion on circumstances should be confined to the racing pages where they can be discussed, whether that be horse welfare, ground or racecourse crossings.
I’m not going to comment much on this, but if admin finds anything inappropriate with my comments he should go ahead and let me know.
I have already suggested a separate fatalities thread Homer, for the reasons you cite. I don’t understand the resistance to this. “Memorials” should be just that. Furious disagreements about the who and why should move to a separate thread.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.